<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Pete Cooper <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:peter_cooper@apple.com" target="_blank">peter_cooper@apple.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><br><div><span class=""><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Jun 4, 2016, at 9:10 AM, David Blaikie <<a href="mailto:dblaikie@gmail.com" target="_blank">dblaikie@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir="ltr">Looks like you just have a variable rename in the unary minus implementation - commit separately or drop that change perhaps?<br></div></div></blockquote></span>Oh yeah. Good catch. Will do that separately.<span class=""><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><br>I don't think you need versions that take two rvalue refs (+(&&, &&)), is there? (until +=/-= get smart and have an overload that takes an rvalue ref parameter and uses it to steal the right hand side buffer if it's bigger than the left hand side buffer or something like that?)<br></div></div></blockquote></span>I had a compile error somewhere in the LLVM codebase without this version. I can’t remember where it is, but a small test (attached to the end of the email if you want to hack on it) which triggers it is:</div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div>rvalue.cpp:66:22: error: use of overloaded operator '+' is ambiguous (with operand types 'APInt' and 'APInt')</div><div> APInt d2 = (a * b) + (a * b);</div><div><br></div></blockquote><div><span class=""><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><br>& can you pass by value instead of by rvalue ref - does that work/choose the right overloads?<br></div></div></blockquote></span>Doesn’t seem to. Using the above as an example, if I remove the && from both arguments then I get:</div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div>rvalue.cpp:72:22: error: use of overloaded operator '+' is ambiguous (with operand types 'APInt' and 'APInt')</div><div> APInt d2 = (a * b) + (a * b);</div><div> ~~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~~~</div><div>rvalue.cpp:35:14: note: candidate function</div><div>inline APInt operator+(APInt a, APInt b) {</div><div> ^</div><div>rvalue.cpp:41:14: note: candidate function</div><div>inline APInt operator+(APInt &&a, const APInt &b) {</div><div> ^</div><div>rvalue.cpp:47:14: note: candidate function</div><div>inline APInt operator+(const APInt &a, APInt &&b) {</div><div> ^</div><div>rvalue.cpp:53:14: note: candidate function</div><div>inline APInt operator+(const APInt &a, const APInt &b) {</div><div><br></div></blockquote>Note, removing the && from all the variants doesn’t improve the situation.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Attached an example that I think works - but I haven't tested. There may be some accidental infinite recursion in there - the version of the patch you have didn't seem to pass all the tests anyway.<br><br>(also noticed you ended up with both member and non-member version of unary operator-, my patch drops the member one (you could probably move operator~ out as a non-member too, but that's pretty orthogonal))</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div><span class=""><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><br>inline APInt operator-(APInt RHS, const APInt &LHS) {<br> RHS += LHS;<br> return RHS; // shouldn't need std::move here because you're returning a local<br>}</div></div></blockquote></span>I wondered about this too. I turned on -Wpessimizing-move to see if what I was doing was wrong but it didn’t fire. Interestingly, with this method:</div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div>inline APInt operator+(APInt &&a, const APInt &b) {</div><div> printf("APInt::+(&&, &)\n");</div><div> a += b;</div><div> return a;</div></blockquote></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This one shouldn't produce a move (& you should add std::move explicitly) because 'a' is not a local here, it's a reference. When it's passed by value there's no need for the std::move:<br><br><div><font face="monospace, monospace">blaikie@blaikie-linux:/tmp/dbginfo$ cat -n test.cpp</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> 1 struct foo {</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> 2 foo(foo&&) = default;</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> 3 };</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> 4 </font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> 5 foo f(foo g) {</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> 6 return g;</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> 7 }</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> 8 foo f2(foo &&g) {</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> 9 return g;</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> 10 }</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace">blaikie@blaikie-linux:/tmp/dbginfo$ clang++-tot -std=c++11 test.cpp -fsyntax-only</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace">test.cpp:9:10: error: call to implicitly-deleted copy constructor of 'foo'</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> return g;</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> ^</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace">test.cpp:2:3: note: copy constructor is implicitly deleted because 'foo' has a user-declared move constructor</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> foo(foo&&) = default;</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace"> ^</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace">1 error generated.</font></div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div>}</div><div><br></div></blockquote>and with/without the std::move on the return. The above version will call APInt::APInt(&) but the std::move version will call APInt::APInt(&&). I used printfs to verify this. So looks like there is a difference here, even though I totally agree with you that we’re returning a local so it shouldn’t need the std::move. I’m not sure if this is a bug, or just subtlety in rvalue semantics. Would love to know the answer though.<div><br></div><div><div><span class=""><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><br>Then you shouldn't need the op-(const APInt&,const APInt&) version, for example.<br></div></div></div></blockquote></span>Not sure if its a result of the other &&’s ending up being required, but i’ve tested without a (const APInt&,const APInt&) version and I get ambiguous overload errors. Seems like i’m going to need it.<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><br>Tests?</div></div></div></blockquote>I was wondering about this. I can certainly test all the variants to make sure I get the correct numerical results from APInt and I’ll add what tests are needed for that. I wouldn’t be able to test whether we get a certain number of malloc’s, unless its ok to implement my own malloc/free the APInt unit test?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yeah, I'd certainly at least test that we get all the right answers (potentially using a data expanded test to exercise all the operations with the same values for different combinations of lvalues, rvalues, and uints).<br><br>As for testing the avoidance of allocation... hrm... I mean it's essentially a non-observable performance thing, and our tests don't really test performance, so perhaps that's fine. In theory you could test that moving happened by caching the result of "getRawData" and check that the pointer value is the same? Not sure if that's a good test.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div><div><br></div><div>Thanks for all the comments so far. Will try get an updated patch tomorrow.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Pete</div><div><br></div><div></div></div></div><br><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Pete Cooper <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:peter_cooper@apple.com" target="_blank">peter_cooper@apple.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">Hi David, Sanjoy<div><br></div><div>Here’s an updated patch which provides all of the combinations of operator[+-] I can think to add.</div><div><br></div><div>All of the new ones are outside the class definition so that we can reduce duplication and have them call each other.</div><div><br></div><div>The one thing I noticed while doing this work was that the already existing operator+= and -= methods really did exactly what I wanted. So i’ve implemented + and - in terms of += and -=.</div><div><br></div><div>Is that ok, or is it frowned upon? I can imagine some people would prefer that += calls + and not the other way round. But it is very convenient as you can see with this patch.</div><div><br></div><div>Comments very welcome.</div><div><br></div><div>BTW, this reduces total allocations by about 400k from 19.1M to 18.7M.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Pete</div><div><br></div><div></div></div><br><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div><br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Jun 2, 2016, at 3:24 PM, Pete Cooper via llvm-commits <<a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>On Jun 2, 2016, at 2:28 PM, Sanjoy Das <<a href="mailto:sanjoy@playingwithpointers.com" target="_blank">sanjoy@playingwithpointers.com</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Pete Cooper <</span><a href="mailto:peter_cooper@apple.com" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">peter_cooper@apple.com</a><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">> wrote:</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><blockquote type="cite" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">Another interesting data point is the compile time. On my test case, SCEV::getRange is 8.9% of compile time which is a lot. But of that, 6.3% is just in ConstantRange::multiply. This method is heavy APInt code, and especially malloc traffic.<br></blockquote><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">Yeah, that is definitely too high! Just to check: I assume you mean</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">8.9% of opt -O2 or something similar?</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"></div></blockquote>Yep, thats right. ‘opt -O2 verify-uselistorder.bc -o opt.bc’. The verify-uselistorder is the pre optimized, but post linked, bitcode when LTOing that tool.</div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br></div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">BTW, I just looked at the latest numbers and the commits i’ve made so far save 3% of compile time on this use case. So the 8.9% is more like 5.9% now. And still a little more to come.<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><blockquote type="cite" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">Many of the speedup’s i’ve been finding involve doing less work (r271020 which avoids the latter half of ConstantRange::multiply and saves 3M allocations), and fixing cases of unnecessary APInt allocations (r270959). This patch is along the same lines as the latter where we have malloc traffic we can avoid.<br></blockquote><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">Making too many fixes on the APInt algorithms to avoid allocations</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">seems like we're solving the issue at the wrong layer. I think fixing</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">infrastructural issues so that we _can_ be a little sloppy (within</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">reason) in extending integers without thinking too much about malloc</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">traffic is the right path.</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"></div></blockquote>I completely agree. There are certainly limits to how far to push this. For example, this code in ConstantRange::multiply:</div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br></div><blockquote style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div> auto L = {this_min * Other_min, this_min * Other_max,</div><div> this_max * Other_min, this_max * Other_max};</div></blockquote><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br></div><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">Once I have the Rvalue ref version of the APInt methods (a change which I think is reasonable), the above could be changed to:</span><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br></div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><div> auto L = {this_min * Other_min, std::move(this_min) * Other_max,</div><div> this_max * std::move(Other_min), std::move(this_max) * Other_max};</div></div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br></div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">This would avoid 3 allocations out of 4 because we will then use the Rvalue APInt methods. However, I think this might</div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">be a little too much hacking. So yeah, I totally agree with you, and hopefully we can solve cases like this one in a more</div><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">reasonable way than gratuitous use of std::move() or other APInt hackery :)<br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">But you're doing the work, so you get to decide the path forward. :)</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"></div></blockquote>Sounds good to me :)<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><blockquote type="cite" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">ConstantRange stats (bit width and count of hits in ConstantRange::ConstantRange)<br></blockquote><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">This is great! Is this a bootstrap of clang or something?</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"></div></blockquote>Actually same use case as before. ‘opt -O2 verify-uselistorder’. Its a nice small bit code which takes about 20s to optimize.<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">Btw, there are couple of bitwidths here that I find interesting, e.g.</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">I'd not have expected this many i70 ConstantRange allocations.</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"></div></blockquote>Yeah, some of these are a bit surprising. 2^n and (2^n)+1 both seem likely due to the IR itself and SCEV, but anything else is a little odd. I may take a look at the 258 bit case just because there are so many of them.</div><div><br></div><div>Pete<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">-- Sanjoy</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><blockquote type="cite" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">1: 30850028<br>2: 7238<br>3: 5733<br>4: 92<br>5: 817<br>6: 294<br>7: 192<br>8: 363498<br>9: 896<br>11: 330<br>12: 378<br>13: 385<br>14: 125<br>16: 30256<br>18: 272<br>20: 98<br>24: 10<br>25: 62<br>26: 13<br>27: 181<br>28: 8<br>31: 98<br>32: 2003134<br>33: 132<br>34: 128<br>36: 76<br>38: 2130<br>41: 3<br>57: 262<br>58: 244<br>59: 342<br>60: 2418<br>61: 1211<br>62: 190<br>63: 226<br>64: 5118228<br>65: 128400<br>66: 4236<br>67: 14826<br>68: 15408<br>69: 13417<br>70: 7959<br>71: 347<br>96: 88<br>128: 364826<br>129: 379580<br>130: 19092<br>256: 4734<br>257: 19132<br>258: 71826<br>514: 4650<br></blockquote><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">--<span> </span></span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">Sanjoy Das</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><a href="http://playingwithpointers.com/" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">http://playingwithpointers.com</a></div></blockquote></div><br></div><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">_______________________________________________</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><span style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">llvm-commits mailing list</span><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><a href="mailto:llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">llvm-commits@lists.llvm.org</a><br style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px"><a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits" style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits</a></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div><br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div></div><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>